Military Participation of African-Americans, Especially

¶ … military participation of African-Americans, especially slaves, who served in both the American and British forces during the American Revolution. Why did blacks, both free and enslaved, serve and how instrumental was their service in defeating the British? Black forces fought on both sides during the American Revolution, and their contributions to both armies were extremely important. A large number of blacks earned their freedom as a result of the fighting, and many more gave their lives in the name of freedom. Blacks did not single-handedly win the American Revolution, but their service was instrumental in many areas, including espionage and infiltration of the enemy.

Blacks fought on both sides during the American Revolution for a number of compelling reasons. Many hoped to gain their freedom because of their commitment to their countries, while others felt the need to defend the idea of freedom, even if they did not enjoy it. As historians Emma Nogrady Kaplan and Sidney Kaplan note, "Not all were patriots. As Benjamin Quarles points out in his study The Negro in the American Revolution, the role of the black soldier or sailor in the Revolutionary War 'can best be understood by realizing that his major loyalty was not to a place nor a people, but to a principle'" (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 3). In fact, Lord Dunmore, the royal governor of Virginia, granted indentured and slave blacks their freedom if they would join the Royal Army and fight the "traitorous" Americans. His proclamation states, "And I do hereby further declare all indentured servants, negroes or others, (appertaining to Rebels,) free that are able and willing to bear arms, they joining His Majesty's troops as soon as may be" (Dunmore 1775, 126-127). It seems that at least one thousand Virginia blacks escaped from their owners and took Dunmore up on his offer of freedom. The Kaplans continue,

The black soldier or sailor was, in fact, eager to fight on two fronts -- for his own freedom and for the freedom of his country. Therefore, when white governors or generals running short of manpower in the army and navy, or white masters chary of risking their necks on the battlefield, promised a slave his freedom if he joined the ranks, he was more than willing to shoulder a musket" (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 32).

Even after losing the war, Great Britain still offered blacks who fought on her side their freedom, and so, the Tory blacks who supported Great Britain actually came out ahead of many American blacks.

Dunmore had some compelling reasons to offer the blacks their freedom. His troops in Virginia only numbered about 300 because of "desertion and harassment," and he was desperate to find new forces to help defend the English loyalists in Williamsburg and other communities (Editors 2005). Dunmore was desperate for recruits, and would take them wherever he could get them. Of course, many Virginia slave owners found his actions to be controversial and frightening. They feared a slave revolt could come as a result of Dunmore's plea for men. His plan worked, he recruited hundreds of black soldiers, but the Congress of Virginia denounced his plan and threatened slaves with death if they escaped their masters. Most people believe Dunmore's plan was the first large scale emancipation of blacks in this country. It gave blacks a taste of freedom, and they only wanted more (Editors 2005).

Not all Americans shared Dunmore's liberal views on blacks fighting during the war. Many northern newspapers and editorials clearly avoided the issue of slavery throughout the war, and many historians believe this was calculated to bring the country together in a united front against the British. Historian Patricia Bradley writes, "Resolved: by avoiding the issue of slavery, the propagandists of the American Revolution made a unified revolution possible, and allowed for the development of a movement that sought full rights for all" (Bradley 1998, 155). Thus, many Americans did not agree with freedom for slaves who fought during the war, and unfortunately, both British and American leaders often turned their backs on blacks after the war, going back on their promises of freedom for service. The editors of the "Black Loyalists" Web Site write, "Of course, many on both sides ignored these policies and sought to profit from their situation when possible by taking the slaves away and selling them" (Editors 2005). Thus, many blacks who fought for their freedom during the war were eventually returned to their masters or sold into slavery once again.

Lord Dunmore urged blacks to fight against the American revolutionaries, but many other Americans did not support Dunmore's views. As an example, George Washington's views of black enlistment varied greatly during the war. Initially, he denied blacks enlistment in the Continental Army, even though his own favorite black slave, William Lee, accompanied him into battle. Author Benjamin Quarles notes, "In the early stages of the war American military and civilian authorities had adopted a policy of excluding Negroes, a policy based on the mistaken supposition that the war would be over quickly" (Quarles 1988, 55). Later, Washington relented and urged blacks to join the ranks of fighting men. Most historians agree he relented not because he reconsidered, but because he, like the British, was desperate for fighting men and the British ranks were filling up with blacks willing to fight for their freedom. Washington's views on slavery, however, were quite different from his initial views on blacks fighting in the war. The Kaplans continue, "Washington's soul-searching about the rightness of slavery is well-known. There was 'not a man living,' he wrote to two friends in 1786, who wished more sincerely than he 'to see some plan adopted by which slavery may be abolished by law'" (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 36). In fact, he liberated all of his slaves in his will, and William Lee gained his freedom before Washington died, along with a stipend of $30 a year for the rest of his life (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 36-37).

While most planters in the South were ardent supporters of slavery and were afraid of arming blacks in the revolutionary forces, some southerners were ardent supports of black liberation and blacks fighting in the Revolution. One of the most noted southern sympathizers was John Lauren, the son of a wealthy planter and merchant. His father, Henry, believed slavery went against religious and moral teachings, but did not speak out against it. In fact, he began building his wealth and holdings as a slave trader in Charleston, South Carolina. Later, Henry Laurens served as the President of the Continental Congress. In contrast, his son was quite vocal in his criticisms of slavery, and he actively worked to create a black military unit in the South. Historian Gregory D. Massey notes, "He [Laurens] eventually conceived a bold plan to enlist slaves in the Continental Army and grant them freedom in return for their service. His proposal not only pledged reinforcements to the dwindling American regular forces but also threatened to subvert the institution of slavery in the lower South" (Massey 2000). Laurens championed the black cause for a number of reasons. Many feel he was young and idealistic, but he had also been educated in Europe, and made friends with progressive thinkers who believed in freedom and equality for all. He brought these ideas home with him and then served as an officer during the Revolutionary War, and that sealed his interest. He served on General Washington's staff, and after seeing the need for able-bodied fighting men, he attempted to create his own force of black fighters, made up of about 45 of the slaves that would come to him as part of his family inheritance. Historian Massey continues, "John hoped that a battalion of slaves who were promised freedom in return for their service would augment the dwindling Continental forces and turn the tide of war toward victory" (Massey 2000). John and his father debated the issue for several months.

Eventually, events and John's own enthusiasm convinced his father the black regiment plan was sound, and the Congress even endorsed the plan. However, it was up to the southern states' legislatures to finally endorse the plan, and most southern legislators heartily disagreed with the plan. They felt giving arms to slaves would put their lives in danger, and that freeing a number of slaves after the war would eventually lead to emancipation of all the slaves. Laurens plan was soundly defeated, and he continued to work to create a black regiment until his death in 1782 during a minor skirmish in South Carolina. Many people feel Laurens wanted a regiment so he could command it on the battlefield, but he denied any personal ambition such as that throughout his life. He maintained he simply wanted to see whites and blacks fight equally for freedom and justice. Historian Massey writes, "Unlike all other southern political leaders of the time, he believed that blacks shared a similar nature with whites, which included a natural right to liberty" (Massey 2000). His plan to create a black regiment in the South failed, but black regiments were created during the war, and some of them were vital to certain battles and victories.

Perhaps the most notable black regiment formed during the war was the 1st Rhode Island Regiment, which has become legendary in the fight for freedom. Colonel Christopher Greene commanded the Regiment, and it was one of only three black regiments to fight during the war. In fact, many historians feel the war might have ended sooner if more regiments like the 1st Rhode Island had been formed and utilized. The Kaplans note, "Colonel Christopher Greene's First Rhode Island Regiment distinguished itself for efficiency and gallantry throughout the war -- perhaps the war would have ended sooner if its example had been heeded" (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 64). Rhode Island was unable to fill its quota of fighting men for the Continental Army, and so the black regiment was formed. The Rhode Island Legislature declared that any black who fought in the regiment would gain freedom and be paid the same wages as any other soldier (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 64). Washington personally assigned Colonel Greene to train and lead the new recruits.

The Regiment proved itself in many battles. One of the first was the Battle of Rhode Island, where they faced both Hessian and British forces. In fact, they fought so bravely that the Hessian commander returned to New York and refused to fight the black Regiment again (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 65). The unit fought the entire war, and distinguished itself again and again. The Kaplans continue,

In the attack made upon the American lines, near Croton river, on the 13th of May, 1781," wrote Nell, "Colonel Greene, the commander of the regiment, was cut down and mortally wounded: but the sabres of the enemy only reached him through the bodies of his faithful guard of blacks, who hovered over him to protect him, and every one of whom was killed" (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 65).

Many others wrote of the Regiment's deportment, manners, skill, and devotion to duty. It is clear they played an important part in the war, and in many key battles. Indeed, if more loyal black regiments had fought during the war, then perhaps the war might not have dragged on as long as it did.

While only a few black regiments actually formed and fought during the war, there were an estimated 5000 soldiers who fought on the American side, and perhaps an equal or greater number on the British side. However, not all of the blacks in the war served as fighting men. One extremely important black combatant was James Armistead, also known as James Armistead Lafayette, after the French general. Armistead, owned by a man named William Armistead, asked his master to allow him to enlist in the French Army under General Lafayette in 1781. He took the General's last name when he went into service with him. The French were actively seeking black recruits to help shore up their own forces as they helped the Americans fight the British. James served the General as a spy, and was so good at infiltrating the British that British General Cornwallis never knew James was an American spy until after the war was over (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 39). In fact, many people believe it was James' influence that led Lafayette to begin a crusade to free blacks and set up a territory where they could live without fear and in freedom (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 40). Lafayette wrote of James' service, "His intelligence from the enemy's camp were industriously collected and more faithfully delivered. He perfectly acquitted himself with some important commissions I gave him and appears to me entitled to every reward his situation can admit of'" (Kaplan, and Kaplan 1989, 39). James frequently traveled between the American and British camps, and Lafayette often fed false information to Cornwallis through James. When the war ended, James was still a slave, but in 1786, the General Assembly of Virginia voted to free him.